The Speed of Light is Instant

Anisotropic Synchrony Convention

posted almost 4 years ago

PAW This Post

The speed of lightis 186,000 miles per second. Correct?

No.

It's important toqualify statements that one makes, particularly when they have to do withtechnical subjects, such as history, science, or other fields where precisionand accuracy are both important. Among other things, this helps to prevent thenecessity of clarifying complex statements if a person misunderstands.

The speed of lightin a vacuum is 186,000 miles per second. Correct?

Nope. But that's abetter explanation than before. It is precise (measuring the speed requiresprecise instruments and technological proficiency) and more accurate than theprevious statement (clarifying that the speed is measured in a vacuum qualifiesthe statement).

The round-trip speedof light in a vacuum is 186,000 miles per second.

It is impossible tomeasure the one-way speed of light. For all we know, it could be instantaneous.

Lightis a dual wave-particle phenomenon. Have you considered what allows your eyesto see light, or your skin to be warmed by it? Does a particle of light attachitself to molecules in your eyes? (Wouldn't a rapid build-up, due to the speedand quantity of incoming photons, be prohibitive in that case?) Does a photonbounce off and go flying in a 180°direction? What happens?

It appears that,since lightis electromagneticradiation, that it energizes particles,and the light energy is then converted into other forms of energy, butprimarily heat and light. In some cases, it is used as a catalyst for chemicalreactions and its energy is converted into mechanical energy and potentialenergy (photosynthesis).A lightparticle/wave would hit an electron in its orbital around an atom, and exciteit, causing it (the electron) to 'jump' to a higher energy state. But whathappens to the photon? Apparently it is absorbedin the process. In fact, when an electron falls down to a lower-energy state,it releases a photon. [citations pending]

As the electron is moved to a different energy state, it becomes possible toformand break different bonds,resulting in conformational changes in various molecules, which drives themechanical processes that produce energy-storing molecules such as glucoseduring photosynthesis.

I read somewhere, Ibelieve in one of the UMBC textbooks, that when an electromagnetic wave (i.e.light) hits a molecule that is part of a larger structure (think cellularorganization), the energy 'pushes the molecule out of its position, whereafterit (the molecule) "snaps" back, emitting a different photon,' presumably in the opposite direction(paraphrased, [citation pending]).

Ladies andgentlemen, I posit that light radiation travels at an instantaneous speed, andthat the time lapse during measurements of its round-trip speed are due to theinteraction of the EM wave with whatever particle the light is reflecting offof before returning to the detector. The implication is that the measuredround-trip speed of light is a measurement of the time it takes for 'light tobounce off a surface by energetically interacting with it,' rather than theactual SPEED of the light itself.

This is a testableprediction. The theory predicts that in terms of astronomical observation, one ought to find that theuniverse appears to be the same age at all distances, no matter how far awayfrom earth one might be able to see with a telescope. This prediction has alarge amount of observational data in support of it--numerous examples of fullyformed galaxies and "old" stars (that is to say, with detectableamounts of non-hydrogen-and-helium atoms, since those are the heaviest elementspredicted to be formed by the Big Bang Model of the universe, and thereforemust, in the BB model, have been formed subsequent to the supernovae of thefirst generation of stars, which would have theoretically produced heavierelements by fusion) are prevalent in the scientificliterature.

Some considerations: Albert Einstein's work underlies this theory, and his ownstatements attest to the truthfulness of what I'm saying.Einstein said thatlight’s one-way speed “is in reality neither a supposition nor a hypothesisabout the physical nature of light, but a stipulation which I can make of myown freewill in order to arrive at a definition of simultaneity [A. Einstein, Relativity: The Special and General Theory, authorized translation by R. W. Lawson (New York: CrownPublishers, 1961), pp. 22–23.]

Also, regarding the Answers Research Journal link--regardless of what you mayfeel toward Creation Science, do please take the time to look through it andmull over the discussion about clock synchronization, which takes up oneportion of the paper. I think that it is an inherently interesting topic, andit will doubtlessly appeal to anyone who enjoys technical mathematical andphilosophical questions, which would still be interesting even if they were notdiscussed in the context of supporting the Biblical Creation Cosmology. So takea look.

~EriK

P.S.Thisconvention could be called the “anisotropic synchrony convention,” or ASC,because it claims that light travels at different speeds in differentdirections (anisotropic).